"Stop and frisk" fascism vs. 2nd Amendment

[toomuchtime_]

Of course it did, but it's an inconvenient statistic for Democrats who want to use race as a political issue.

yeah as oppose to republicans who never bring up race? LMAO! your are insane, hows your wall btw

You are correct that Republicans don't bring up race, and are you referring to the wall Senator Clinton voted for twice?

thats all republicans talk about is race, its a white supremacist hate group

It's the Democrats who are talking about it all the time.

yeah how to stop your racist party from achieving its many racist goals maybe

No, how to dupe black people into voting for some one who referred to young balck men as animals that had to be brought to heel.

 

[2aguy]

So what's it going to be republicans, or are you all hypocrites? Or is the 2nd amendment just for whites?.... which confirms your bigotry.

Stop and frisk is an element of proactive policing, trying to prevent violent crimes rather than just clean up the bodies afterwards. Since black people and Hispanics are disproportionately the victims of violent crime, they are also the greatest beneficiaries of stop and frisk, so the question is, is it worse for a young black man to be unfairly stopped by police or to be murdered because some one else was not stopped by police? Hillary, and you apparently, think he'd be better off dead.

so you support police racially profiling and illegally searching blacks and hispanics, "for their own good"

I support police efforts to try to save their lives and you and Hillary obviously put little value on the lives of young black and Hispanic men.

Point is with body camera requirements to participate in stop & frisk the proof or lack thereof of probable cause will be available

not true they did not need probable cause you dont even know what the fuck your talking about

Debate Fact Check: Trump Wrong, Stop and Frisk was Ruled Unconstitutional

By one local NY judge. We all know court rulings like this are battled all the way to scotus. One local judge does not get to determine what is constitutional across the land.

so why would that court say it violated the fourth, if they required probable cause? what the fuck are you talking about?

This was a federal district court decision that would have been overturned on appeal because it is in direct contradiction of a Supreme Court decision allowing stop and frisk. It was a political decision by the mayor that kept it from being overturned.

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."[1]

For their own protection, after a person has been stopped, police may perform a quick surface search of the person’s outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed. This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not merely upon an officer's hunch. This permitted police action has subsequently been referred to in short as a "stop and frisk," or simply a "Terry frisk". The Terry standard was later extended to temporary detentions of persons in vehicles, known as traffic stops; see Terry stop for a summary of subsequent jurisprudence.

The rationale behind the Supreme Court decision revolves around the understanding that, as the opinion notes, "theexclusionary rule has its limitations." The meaning of the rule is to protect persons from unreasonable searches and seizures aimed at gathering evidence, not searches and seizures for other purposes (like prevention of crime or personal protection of police officers).

Terry v. Ohio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not only that but officer safety....

 

[PurpleOwl]

Maybe the reason republicans think racism doesn't exist is because fox news and AM hate radio never covers it?

We cover it all the time......we keep pointing out all the racism in the democrat party, but as long as they are giving out free stuff...you twits don't care....

saying black people vote for the democrats to get free stuff is a racist statement you fucking nazi moron

 

[2aguy]

So what's it going to be republicans, or are you all hypocrites? Or is the 2nd amendment just for whites?.... which confirms your bigotry.

The assholes on the left such as Cunton last night fail to recognize that stop and frisk lowered the crime rate in NYC it dropped 85% under Rudy's administration...All the racist left wants to do is protect #BLM! And the Thugery pandering to supposed black votes.

I'd like to protect people's rights under the fourth amendment and the fifth amendment. If the second is so valuable to be used as an excuse to continue the chaos of gun violence, what makes the 4th and 5th so expendable?

The 2nd doesn't cause gun violence...in fact it helps end it.......left wing judges who let gun criminals out after short prison sentences causes gun crime...over and over again...

 

[toomuchtime_]

So what's it going to be republicans, or are you all hypocrites? Or is the 2nd amendment just for whites?.... which confirms your bigotry.

Stop and frisk is an element of proactive policing, trying to prevent violent crimes rather than just clean up the bodies afterwards. Since black people and Hispanics are disproportionately the victims of violent crime, they are also the greatest beneficiaries of stop and frisk, so the question is, is it worse for a young black man to be unfairly stopped by police or to be murdered because some one else was not stopped by police? Hillary, and you apparently, think he'd be better off dead.

so you support police racially profiling and illegally searching blacks and hispanics, "for their own good"

Nope......gang members who are familiar to police...sure.......in Chicago there are 1,333 known gang members and they are the ones doing the shooting.......it would be nice if the police could stop them before they commit murder...wouldn't that be nice?

maybe they should just arrest all black people so you can feel safe? after all their not real americans anyway right?

Hillary thinks they are animals that have to be brought to heel.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

republicans support every gun law imaginable for black people, but to be fair they dont support black people have any rights whatsoever not just gun rights or the right not to be searched

So, you were born mentally retarded and THEN suffered head trauma?

 

[2aguy]

I did. And probable cause has been used for over a hundred years so do tell, if it's unconstituional why does EVERY POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES still exercise it?

They use it in routine traffic stops where a violation can already be cited. But stop and frisk can be done without a citable violation. And that's where the worm turns, doesn't it?

Which is why I said probable cause & body cameras are a must.

How is this bad in any way?

To randomly stop and frisk someone without a search warrant is a direct violation of their 4thg amendment rights. If the 4th is so elastic to be dismissed, why isn't the 2nd?

And of course the projection begins. When & where did I say RANDOM?

That's right, I didn't. Just more moving of the goal posts

What are the criteria for a stop and frisk? And why do you think it conforms to the 4th amendment? What about the fifth amendment?

Let's take a look at the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It seems as if anything seized during a warrantless stop and frisk can be used as evidence against a suspect. That evidence serves as a witness and was seized without consent.

Then you must be against registering guns and licensing gun owners.......since that opens one up to prosecution if they are not able to legally own a gun...

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

They have to have probable cause to stop & frisk.

Bullshit! Again, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about. In Terry v. Ohio SCOTUS found that a LEO could detain a person and frisk their outer garments ONLY IF they had SUSPICION and REASONABLE CAUSE that a person was carrying a weapon. "Terry Stops" did not have to rise to the level of probable cause required by Amendment IV but had to exceed UNREASONABLE searches and seizures which were violative of Amendment IV! Here's the decision so you can edify your dumb ass!
Terry v. Ohio

In Aug 2013, Federal Judge Shira A. Scheindlin found Terry Stops, as conducted by the NYPD WERE violative of Amendment IV because of widespread racial profiling which was OUTSIDE of the requirement for "reasonable suspicion/cause"! You can read her decision here:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/08/12/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-decision.html

Suspicion & reasonable cause. Semantics that mean the same fucking thing with the same end result.

Why are you morons playing these stupid word games?

Bullshit, you idiot! Under LAW reasonable cause and probable cause are two different animals! Cavity searches on drug mules have to be justified by probable cause or the search and possible seizure would be unconstitutional. In your case, it would benefit you by enabling you to breath once again with your head out of your ass!

 

[PurpleOwl]

yeah as oppose to republicans who never bring up race? LMAO! your are insane, hows your wall btw

You are correct that Republicans don't bring up race, and are you referring to the wall Senator Clinton voted for twice?

thats all republicans talk about is race, its a white supremacist hate group

It's the Democrats who are talking about it all the time.

yeah how to stop your racist party from achieving its many racist goals maybe

No, how to dupe black people into voting for some one who referred to young balck men as animals that had to be brought to heel.

that never happened as oppose to trump who was actually convicted of discriminating against black people in his apartments,but stop and frisk has nothing to do with clinton, and other than trump saying he supports it, it has nothing to do with him either, and since this is your 3rd attempt to derail im assuming ive answered all your questions about stop and frisk

 

[Nosmo King]

So what's it going to be republicans, or are you all hypocrites? Or is the 2nd amendment just for whites?.... which confirms your bigotry.

The assholes on the left such as Cunton last night fail to recognize that stop and frisk lowered the crime rate in NYC it dropped 85% under Rudy's administration...All the racist left wants to do is protect #BLM! And the Thugery pandering to supposed black votes.

I'd like to protect people's rights under the fourth amendment and the fifth amendment. If the second is so valuable to be used as an excuse to continue the chaos of gun violence, what makes the 4th and 5th so expendable?

The 2nd doesn't cause gun violence...in fact it helps end it.......left wing judges who let gun criminals out after short prison sentences causes gun crime...over and over again...

First, let's admit that gun violence in and of itself is impossible without the presence of guns.

But you have done a very pretty Fred Astaire around the qyestions concerning the 4th and 5th amendments. What makes those amendments so dispensable while the 2nd must be defended hammer and tong?

 

[2aguy]

You know how you do this......you get the individuals name and birth date when you talk to them...call it in, if they have a felony conviction...then you can search them for a gun......

 

[2aguy]

Stop & Frisk is an attempt to curb rampant crime & murder. You think it's a bad program, fine. What is your solution to the problem?

Follow the law. That applies to both cop and criminal. If you want to dismiss fourth amendment protections, let's then compromise on second amendment answers.

There is no compromise on the 4th outside of your imagination

Warrantless searches and seizure comes immediately to my imagination, how about yours?

no matter what you say he wont change his mind... he doesn't even know what stop and frisk is, he's learning about it for the first time now, he just knows black people dont like it, so it must be good

That's not fair. I don't imagine any racism on his part. I just want to understand why some constitutional protections are more valuable than others. If the 2nd amendment is to be defended until death (and that's an apt description when one considers to chaos of gun violence and the intractable arguments of gun lovers), why is the fourth amendment so easily dismissed?

Not dismissed.....just trying to think like a lefty.......you guys don't care about the 1st Amendment or the 2nd, so why should the 4th be so important to you....?

 

[PurpleOwl]

[

republicans support every gun law imaginable for black people, but to be fair they dont support black people have any rights whatsoever not just gun rights or the right not to be searched

So, you were born mentally retarded and THEN suffered head trauma?

what part about that is wrong?

 

[Nosmo King]

They use it in routine traffic stops where a violation can already be cited. But stop and frisk can be done without a citable violation. And that's where the worm turns, doesn't it?

Which is why I said probable cause & body cameras are a must.

How is this bad in any way?

To randomly stop and frisk someone without a search warrant is a direct violation of their 4thg amendment rights. If the 4th is so elastic to be dismissed, why isn't the 2nd?

And of course the projection begins. When & where did I say RANDOM?

That's right, I didn't. Just more moving of the goal posts

What are the criteria for a stop and frisk? And why do you think it conforms to the 4th amendment? What about the fifth amendment?

Let's take a look at the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It seems as if anything seized during a warrantless stop and frisk can be used as evidence against a suspect. That evidence serves as a witness and was seized without consent.

Then you must be against registering guns and licensing gun owners.......since that opens one up to prosecution if they are not able to legally own a gun...

If they are not legally permitted to own a gun, why do you want them to have guns?

 

[PurpleOwl]

Follow the law. That applies to both cop and criminal. If you want to dismiss fourth amendment protections, let's then compromise on second amendment answers.

There is no compromise on the 4th outside of your imagination

Warrantless searches and seizure comes immediately to my imagination, how about yours?

no matter what you say he wont change his mind... he doesn't even know what stop and frisk is, he's learning about it for the first time now, he just knows black people dont like it, so it must be good

That's not fair. I don't imagine any racism on his part. I just want to understand why some constitutional protections are more valuable than others. If the 2nd amendment is to be defended until death (and that's an apt description when one considers to chaos of gun violence and the intractable arguments of gun lovers), why is the fourth amendment so easily dismissed?

Not dismissed.....just trying to think like a lefty.......you guys don't care about the 1st Amendment or the 2nd, so why should the 4th be so important to you....?

other than hate speech what do you care about the 1st?

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
saying black people vote for the democrats to get free stuff is a racist statement you fucking nazi moron

Saying the sky is blue is no doubt also racist, you drooling retard.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If "stop and frisk" violates the constitution, then how do background checks for the purchase of a gun not also violate the constitution?

 

[2aguy]

You are correct that Republicans don't bring up race, and are you referring to the wall Senator Clinton voted for twice?

thats all republicans talk about is race, its a white supremacist hate group

It's the Democrats who are talking about it all the time.

yeah how to stop your racist party from achieving its many racist goals maybe

No, how to dupe black people into voting for some one who referred to young balck men as animals that had to be brought to heel.

that never happened as oppose to trump who was actually convicted of discriminating against black people in his apartments,but stop and frisk has nothing to do with clinton, and other than trump saying he supports it, it has nothing to do with him either, and since this is your 3rd attempt to derail im assuming ive answered all your questions about stop and frisk

Wrong.....Trump was attacked by race hustlers and settled the suit.......hilary called black men super predators and her husband locked them up........then he awarded the Presidential medal of Freedom to his good friend, political mentor, and racist...j. william fulbright......

 

[Nosmo King]

Follow the law. That applies to both cop and criminal. If you want to dismiss fourth amendment protections, let's then compromise on second amendment answers.

There is no compromise on the 4th outside of your imagination

Warrantless searches and seizure comes immediately to my imagination, how about yours?

no matter what you say he wont change his mind... he doesn't even know what stop and frisk is, he's learning about it for the first time now, he just knows black people dont like it, so it must be good

That's not fair. I don't imagine any racism on his part. I just want to understand why some constitutional protections are more valuable than others. If the 2nd amendment is to be defended until death (and that's an apt description when one considers to chaos of gun violence and the intractable arguments of gun lovers), why is the fourth amendment so easily dismissed?

Not dismissed.....just trying to think like a lefty.......you guys don't care about the 1st Amendment or the 2nd, so why should the 4th be so important to you....?

I jealously guard the first amendment. I read the 2nd as "a well regulated militia being necessary for a free state", not anybody with an index finger can be a 'militia'.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

that never happened as oppose to trump who was actually convicted of discriminating against black people in his apartments,but stop and frisk has nothing to do with clinton, and other than trump saying he supports it, it has nothing to do with him either, and since this is your 3rd attempt to derail im assuming ive answered all your questions about stop and frisk

Ah, so you're a liar as well as a retard.